9/11 Ground Zero

lol what a topic change xD

not really

From teh first video with Obama... to the last... lol

ah, yeah ok, maybe - but Conspirism is still present - and against america

Well... at least it was fun xD

First: America is spelled with a capital "A". Just like the rest of the countries in this world. The first letter is capitalized.

Second: Andreask, as much as I like you, I will simply tell you that you don't know, you simply do not know what you are posting here. The "evidence" you posted via YouTube is only the conspiracy theorists ideas. Not the facts. Yes 9/11 is not what it seemed to be entirely. I have a post here about 4 years ago ( will see if I can find it) that will enlighten you and possibly steer you in the right direction.

Another good example is this idea that GWB invaded Iraq for oil. No, it's for a far different reason, that only a few seem to understand. I do.

3% of our oil comes from Iraq pre-war. : So no, oil is not it.

Money: This is the United States. We don't need anymore money.

World Domination: The only standing Super Power....enough said.

Drugs: Mexico..not that either.

However, people like you actually believe the dribble you posted, instead of actually using strategic logic and thinking this through.

I don't see anything wrong with a North American Union. Care to elaborate?

P.S Do not attack me, I have UAVs

Grand...

Up until 2007 I was active duty in the USMC, 19 years service. I spent the majority of my last 6 years of service ingrained in the topic you are trying to discuss.( and I still am today to some degree). None of your accusations towards the motives of the US hold any weight or enough actual fact to even be probable. Unfortunately you are brainwashed by the conspiracy theorists and their mantra, which you hold as truth.

I will have to take some time and post ( again) one of the real reasons we actually went to Iraq. History will prove GWB correct in the majority of his actions, it may take 25 years, but he will be vindicated to a great degree. However, part of his intentions ( doesn't mean I agree ), are starting to come to fruition now in dealing with Iran's nuke program. Sometimes in order to force a stalemate, or to keep the king in check, you need to sacrifice your Queen so the Rooks can make the kill.

Considering the extensive financial and national policy investment Iran has committed to its nuclear projects, it is almost certain that an attack by Israel or the United States would result in immediate retaliation. A likely scenario includes an immediate Iranian missile counterattack on Israel and U.S. bases in the Gulf, followed by a very serious effort to destabilize Iraq and foment all-out confrontation between the United States and Iraq's Shi'i majority. Iran could also opt to destabilize Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states with a significant Shi'i population, and induce Lebanese Hizbullah to launch a series of rocket attacks on Northern Israel.

What we prepared for since 2004:

What follows is the unfolding of a worst-case scenario, an imaginary yet all-too-possible depiction of how events might develop if Israel were to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities.
Day One: Wednesday -- In a pre-dawn raid, undisclosed numbers of Israeli warplanes, taking off from military airbases in the Negev, destroy Iran’s main nuclear facility at Bushehr. ..During the one-hour raid, Iran claims to have shot down “several” Israeli fighters. Television images show pilots being lynched by furious mobs before Iranian authorities could reach them. The after-effects of the raid shake the Arab and Islamic world. Millions take to the streets demanding immediate action against Israel...American intelligence convinced Israel that as long as Musharraf remains in power, Pakistan does not represent an imminent threat. The decision was made not to hit Pakistan.
Day Two: Thursday - Iran retaliates. Thousands of Revolutionary Guards are dispatched across the border into Iraq with orders to inflict as many casualties on American troops as possible. Iranian sleeper agents, who have infiltrated Iraq since the downfall of Saddam, urge Iraqi Shi’ites into action. Tehran orders the Lebanese Shi’ite movement, Hezbollah, into action against northern Israel. Hezbollah launches scores of rockets and mortars against kibbutzim, towns, and settlements. Israel retaliates. Crowds of gigantic proportions take to the streets, ransacking Israeli embassies in Cairo, Amman, and Ankara. American embassies in a number of other cities are burned.
Day Three: Friday - Following Friday prayers across the Islamic world, crowds incited by fiery sermons in mosques from Casablanca to Karachi take to the streets in the worst protests yet. In Saudi Arabia, Islamist militants engage in open gun battles with security forces in several cities. In Indonesia, Malaysia, Egypt, and a dozen other countries, crowds continue to run amok, demanding war on Israel.
Day Four: Saturday - A longstanding plan to overthrow Musharraf is carried out by senior Pakistani army officers loyal to the Islamic fundamentalists and with close ties to bin Laden. Within hours, and before news of the coup leaks out, Pakistan, now run by pro-bin Laden fundamentalists, loads two nuclear weapons aboard executive Lear jets [that] dive into the outskirts of the two [Israeli] cities, detonating their nuclear devices in the process.

You can figure the rest out........

More potential reasons why we are in Iraq......and Afghanistan.

world nuclear war is one that involves most or all nuclear powers releasing a large proportion of their nuclear weapons at targets in nuclear, and perhaps non-nuclear, states. Such a war could be initiated accidentally, aggressively or pre-emptively and could continue and spread through these means or by retaliation by a party attacked by nuclear weapons. While some speak of "limited nuclear war," it is likely that any nuclear war will quickly escalate and spiral out of control because of the "use them or loose them" strategy. If you don't use all your nuclear weapons you are likely to have them destroyed by the enemy's nuclear weapons.
Such a war could start through a reaction to terrorist attacks, or through the need to protect against overwhelming military opposition, or through the use of small battle field tactical nuclear weapons meant to destroy hardened targets. It might quickly move on to the use of strategic nuclear weapons delivered by short-range or inter-continental missile or long-range bomber. These could deliver high altitude bursts whose electromagnetic pulse knocks out electrical circuits for hundreds of square miles. Or they could deliver nuclear bombs to destroys nuclear and/or non-nuclear military facilities, nuclear power plants, important industrial sites and cities. Or it could skip all those steps and start through the accidental or reckless use of strategic weapons.
Below are seven scenarios by which world nuclear war could come about. While these are some of the major scenarios and combination of attacks and retaliations, they are hardly exhaustive. U.S., Russian and other nuclear nations' weapons strategizers deal with these scenarios every day but rarely let mere citizens in on their grizzly thinking. Citizens must end their denial and become aware of such scenarios.

GENERAL SCENARIOS

Accidental: Since the United States and Russia have "launch on warning" systems that send off rockets before it is confirmed a nuclear attack is underway, any tensions between them can lead to massive nuclear war within thirty minutes of a warning -- no matter how false the warning may be.

Aggressive: One or more nations decides to use weapons against nuclear or non-nuclear nations in order to promote an economic, political or military goal, as part of an ongoing war or as a first strike nuclear attack. (The state , of course, may claim it is a pre-emptive, retaliatory or even accidental attack.)

Pre-emptive: One or more nations believes (correctly or incorrectly) or claims to believe that another nuclear nation is about to use nuclear weapons against its nuclear, military, industrial or civilian targets and pre-emptively attacks that nation. May result from political or military "brinkmanship."

Retaliatory: Use of nuclear weapons in response to a nuclear attack -- or even a conventional, chemical or biological attack by a non-nuclear nation.

ASSUMPTIONS OF THESE SCENARIOS
There is a whole body of knowledge and assumptions that is taken into account when putting together scenarios like the below. My bottom line assumption is that any nuclear exchange has an excellent chance of resulting in a series of escalations that will spiral out of control, setting off a round of exchanges among various enemies under a "use it or lose it" philosophy, as well as among the treaty allies of the relevant nuclear powers and their allies. This continues until most of the planets' 20,000 odd nuclear weapons are exhausted. In making "limited nuclear war" calculations all nations should assume "whatever can go wrong, will go wrong." Unfortunately, too many strategizers assume they can conduct limited strikes and keep them limited.
Related assumptions include:
** Any nuclear attack on a primary Russian target like Moscow, St. Petersburg, or nuclear command headquarters, by any nation or group, known or unknown, could lead to a commander turning on "The Dead Hand" strategy and/or prompt one or more of Russia’s semi-autonomous military field commanders to retaliate against U.S. and European nuclear targets. Attacks on secondary targets or nuclear detonations very close to Russian soil also might lead to some sort of nuclear escalation.
** Any nuclear attack on US and/or European sites by any nation or group, known or unknown, probably will result in massive US and/or European retaliation against the known or assumed perpetrators or their known or assumed allies.
** It is likely that the U.S., Russia, China, Israel, India and Pakistan will use some of their weapons to attack other nuclear and non-nuclear nations which might threaten them after they have been devastated by nuclear war.
** Any nuclear attack on Israel by terrorists, or Pakistan, Russia or China will result in Israel’s surviving land, air and submarine carried or based missiles being used against Arab and Muslim capitals. A particularly devastating attack (including with chemical or biological weapons) might result in possibly in a full scale "Samson Option" attack on European and Russian targets. The latter of course would result in Russian retaliation against the United States, perhaps its punishment for not having done enough to protect Israel.
** Any nation's use of nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear nation will be only somewhat less inflammatory than using them against a nuclear nation, especially if that nation has many treaty allies. It will ratchet all nuclear nations alert systems and lead to unforeseeable consequences that could easily spiral to world nuclear war.

SCENARIO 1. RUSSIA OR U.S. MISTAKENLY INTERPRETS GLITCH DURING TIME OF TENSION AS NUCLEAR ATTACK, LEADING TO WORLD NUCLEAR WAR

During time of minor or major political tension, especially active U.S. bombings of other nations or any use of nuclear weapons, Russian commanders' faulty early warning system detects false evidence of a nuclear attack from the U.S. Russia launches a large proportion of its weapons at the U.S. and pre-emptively at U.S. European and Israeli allies, as well as China, India and Pakistan to cripple their nuclear capability. The U.S. and Europe retaliate at Russia and U.S. attacks China to destroy its nuclear stocks. Israel retaliates against Russia and initiates aggressive attacks against Arab and Muslim capitols. India and China may strike each other to destroy any remaining nuclear or other military capability.(While less likely the United States would experience such a glitch, if so, the U.S. would strike Russia and China, they would retaliate against the U.S. and Europe and probably attack other potentially hostile nuclear powers to knock out their capability.)

SCENARIO 2.
U.S. OR RUSSIA THREATEN OR ENGAGE IN MILITARY AGGRESSION AGAINST SMALLER NATION, STARTING ESCALATION TO WORLD NUCLEAR WAR

Russia and US engage in threats over further US aggression in the Middle East or Russia's refusal to withdraw troops from former Soviet Republic Georgia. Russia and/or the U.S. pre-emptively strike the others' nuclear targets, leading to further rounds of retaliatory exchanges. Russia strikes pre-emptively at U.S. European and Israeli allies, as well as China, India and Pakistan to cripple their nuclear capability. Europe retaliates at Russia and U.S. attacks China to destroy any remaining nuclear stocks. Israel retaliates against Russia and initiates revenge attacks against Arab and Muslim capitols. India and China may strike each other to destroy any remaining nuclear or other military capability.

SCENARIO 3.
ISRAEL ATTACKS IRAN'S NUCLEAR FACILITIES AND/OR SYRIA AND LEBANON WHICH RETALIATE WITH MASSIVE CONVENTIONAL OR WMD ROCKET ATTACKS, ISRAEL RETALIATES WITH NUCLEAR WEAPONS, ESCALATING TO WORLD NUCLEAR WAR

Israel attacks Iran's nuclear facilities and/or Syria and Lebanon. These countries respond with massive rocket attacks using conventional bombs and even some chemical, biological or radiological weapons. Israel responds with nuclear strikes against these nations and Pakistan. Outraged Pakistan retaliates against Israel and pre-emptively attacks Israel's ally/Pakistan's enemy India, which retaliates. Israel initiates "Samson option" and attacks Arab and Muslim capitols, as well as "antisemitic" Europe and Russia. Russian regional commanders retaliate against Israel, its ally the U.S., and U.S. European allies and China, to destroy its nuclear capability. The U.S. retaliates against Russia and hits China's nuclear capability. China uses any remaining nuclear weapons against Russia, the U.S. and India. India retaliates against China.

SCENARIO 4. INDIA-PAKISTAN NUCLEAR EXCHANGE ESCALATES TO WORLD NUCLEAR WAR

Hindu and Muslim rioting or conflicts in Kashmir escalate into preemptive nuclear exchanges between India and Pakistan. A rogue Indian general strikes China which massively retaliates. Russian communications knocked out by electromagnetic pulses hit Europe and China with limited number of missiles. U.S. retaliates against Russia and attacks China to destroy its nuclear stocks. Russia retaliates against the U.S. and hits U.S. ally Israel. Israel initiates revenge attacks against Arab and Muslim capitols.

SCENARIO 5. CHINA INVADES TAIWAN, STARTING ESCALATION TO WORLD NUCLEAR WAR

Taiwan declares independence. China begins Taiwan invasion, threatening to use nuclear weapons against U.S. cities. U.S. gives China an ultimatum to pull out which it ignores and U.S. uses nuclear weapons to destroy China's weapons. China retaliates against U.S. and nukes Taiwan. A few nervous or chauvinistic Russian regional missile commanders make a first strike against U.S., European and Israeli nuclear weapons sites. The U.S., Israel and Europe retaliate. Israel initiates revenge attacks against Arab and Muslim capitols. Pakistan, India and China exchange pre-emptive nuclear strikes.

SCENARIO 6.
UNKNOWN PARTIES USE NUCLEAR WEAPONS ON ISRAEL, RUSSIA OR THE
U.S. STARTING ESCALATION TO WORLD NUCLEAR WAR

Terrorists or some unknown nation explodes one or two nuclear weapons in Russia, Israel, or U.S., possibly delivered via surreptitious means. Russia and the U.S. blame each other escalating to mutual "retaliatory" attacks, including on Europe. If Russia attacks Israel,Israel immediately initiates revenge attacks against Arab and Muslim capitols, and possibly "anti-semitic" Europe and Russia. Russia and U.S. preemptively attack China, and India and Pakistan pre-emptively attack each other, to destroy nuclear and military capabilities.

I wish people could stand back and see things from a neutral point of view.

Bad things happen in our world because people believe in different things, people will die before standing back from there beliefs and leaving people alone...

Debate is good, I like debate, it's how people come to an understanding of each other and the subject in hand, but people never seem to realise that unless you try to find common ground with each other then it will just turn into an argument.

You don't NEED to prove anything to anyone, if you believe that someone is being lied to, or that you know the truth and you have to tell everyone then step back before saying anything.

You must call into question why you feel angry, why it matters that you must express that anger and whether there is a way of coming together and seeing the problem from the same side.

I feel I have to tell you my belief only because I wish to make a point in general:

9/11 was the most publicized act of bringing hatred to the world I have witnessed in my life and the day I saw the live feeds on every TV channel I knew in the depths of my heart that it was all wrong, that this is not the way the world should be.

I knew it was staged, every fibre of my intellect said those towers should not have "fallen" the way they did.

there is so much to say here I can't even type it out concisely. Basically I believe we have all been played by our governments, that even the terrorists from the middle east or the marines from the US or the NATO forces from Europe are all fighting for NO GOOD REASON, because fighting is wrong, killing is wrong and people don't seem to realize it!

I don't see why we even have weapons to kill each other, or why we have urges for violence, and the media just makes killing and warfare 'fun' and like a 'game'...

Maybe we are all just animals fighting over territory, these wars are just extensions of our animalistic nature, Money is our territory and our nation is our pride of females to protect...

If that is the case then I believe this will go on forever until we are all dead, until we are all governed by the same law and religion or until we find a state of balance as is the case in nature untouched by man.

So these debates are just the same as the Americans going into another country and killing people and the same as terrorists blowing themselves up in America or Lions chasing down a zebra...

My only thought and belief that things will be ok and that life can be good despite all the people wanting to kill each other or fuel there rage and righteousness is that I am good, and I don't harm people.

I am aware of how much of a luxury it is to live in my country and at the expense of other countries.

I am aware of being moulded by the world that surrounds me and I know I think very differently from a person brought up amongst crime or poverty or warfare.

So I can only humbly say these things as my own personal belief and I can not challenge another human being on their belief.

The world is a shit place, but if you can find a common ground with someone then you can both fix some shit together.

P.S. Who here protested the war in iraq?

No country is perfect... as it's filled and ruled by humans which aren't perfect at all.

It just matters where you point your "that's the guilty one" pointer finger. To USA ? to China ? comunism, agression, to Iran/arabic states ? even more agression, revenge for everything, to Russia ? Germany ? some country in Africa ? do you find there a perfect country ? India would just be the most peaceful As they are traders since they are known... where Europe and everyone were travelling to there for species and unique stuff.

Now it matters from which country are you... as you will defend it... or hate it.

Noone can fully be objective as well, as outsiders can't know the real and full information about everything to say "This is wrong, very bad".

In my opinion, USA (as difference from other countryes) did more good than bad... just thinking at who saved europe from Germany's invasion, or from Japan's invasion everywhere too... they mase us/the europe to pay ? Of course... USA likes power ? of course... they made mistakes ? Of course.

So I don't care about others criticizing You don't even know if the twin towers had a sort of malfunction, or mistake when building them... and instead making a catastrophe while letting them fall over people when there's more people inside, or putting the creator as guilty and demolate them oficially, just put it as terrorism and get a reason to invade a zone in Asia, Irak.
And I know Gunny knows more about USA just for living in there.

Just don't point your "that's the guilty one" finger at a place or country or race... as you can try turning the finger backwards and see what Your country did good or bad, mine is a pain as the people itself hates it... we're just waiting for somebody else to take control over it xD lol

Great post grand, but have you ever heard of the golden circle? If not look it up please, that should explain some of the theory that you have. The light is too bright to look at directly. hehehe wear sunglasses.